suggestions on upgrading to a new pc

On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:37:26 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:53:51 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message
.com,
uncle ted writes
i should have added that i currently have cs4 and lightroom 2.4 as my
editing software.
thank you guys for all the replys, i can't read them all now im on my
lunch break ,ill read them tonight.

Stick with Windows. If you have problems with either of those apps
and call Adobe and tell then you are running Linux and an emulator
they will tell you they can't help! Their fist question will be are
you on Windows or OSX.... and a Windows emulator is not the answer.

BTW Linux is not an OS but a generic name for over 1000 different
versions of a base system. Versions of Linux come and go all the
time. Redhat and suse are two of the very few long stayers. Ubunto
has not been around long enough yet. I recall others that were going
to save the world a decade ago that are long gone.

BTW - technically, you are wrong. Linux is the kernel. There are not
"over 1000 versions of a base system" either, according to
distrowatch.com, there are around 300 Linux distributions - so?

445 apparently.... they have obviously cleared out the list.

Apparently you need glasses. The latest version of the distrowatch weekly
shows 312 active Linux distributions. You'd have to be a real masochist
to select an inactvie one.


You don't
need more than one (or possibly two - if you have significantly
different requirements on different computers - just like you might have
a server version of MS as well as a desktop version)

No not like Windows... both versions would come from MS and be designed
to work together.

OK, you're right. Not like windows. You could easily set up both desktops
AND severs from one single Linux distribution.


. Certainly versions of Linux
come and go - so do versions of MS.

No MS is till there.

I see. How is your support for win95, win98, win3.1?

As is support for all their OS versions for the last decade with the
planned stop dates etc.

I see. How is your support for win95, win98, win3.1?

Linux distributions can (and do) disappear at any time on zero notice
(usually when wife/girlfriend call time, or they actually find a
girlfriend)

I'm not aware of a major Linux distribution that has 'disappeared' in the
last 10 years - that's how long I've been involved. So what if they do?
It's quite possible to transfer everything to a new install anyway, and
most computers do not 'last' for more than a few years anyway - at which
point you have to transfer all the data - even if you're using ms.



There are, however, many stable Linux
distributions which have been here for a while and will remain to be.

Which will be stable and there for the next 10 years? Which will have an
ongoing path with future hardware? Which will definitely continue to be
supported by the apps I want to use?

Most of the major players, I would asume - you would probably assume not.
Should we make a wager?


If I am going to base a business on it I need to know

Well, you can 'know' that support for win98 is gone and that xp's demise
has already been set. With a major Linux distribution, you install it
once and then do your upgrades as new versions of that distribution come
out. I installed Gentoo once - about 8 years ago - with the rolling
upgrades, it's still viable and it's still current.




Support for versions of Linux can disappear at any time. Not a
problem unless it is the one you have. At least MS continues support
for their older versions for many years after end of life. I still
have a stable win98 (that is a system over a decade old)

I'm glad to hear that MS still supports your win98 - actually, I don't
believe it.

They do.

If you'll note, no major Linux distribution has 'disappeared'
for some time.

Interesting... So all we have to do is use a "major" distribution... so
that lets out most of the 450 listed ones. And we will have less chance
of it disappearing.

If you pick one from near the top of the Distrowatch hit page list,
you'll have no problems.


All that's necessary is to select one of the major players.

So Red Hat is it then

If you're going to comment on things you know nothing about it would be
good to at least get the terminology correct - it would camoflage some
of your ignorance.

I know a lot more than I have let on. :-)

I'd certainly hope so - but, as you say, you certainly have not showed it!

On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:44:54 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:46:26 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:27:20 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , Bob Larter
writes
Ray Fischer wrote:
ray wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:40:04 -0700, wrote:

looking for some input/suggestions on buying new pc.

im shooting with the 5d mark II ,raw files are big around 25 the
mb region
my current specs are below .

machine is slowing a bit around 1 1/2 yr old looking to upgrade
to a new one .

INTEL PENTIUM 4 3.20 GHZ
NVDIA GEFORCE 7800 GS
200 GG HD ATA
4 GB RAM
WINDOWS XP PRO
GATEWAY 24 IN HD MONITOR
calabrated with the xrite pro
Problem is not with the machine - problem is with the OS. You
keep
mucking with MS it's going to keep running slower from the day you
install. Suggest you try Linux instead -
And using the computer will be slower from day one because you'll
have
to spend more time taking care of the OS.

With Linux? Are you kidding? One of the biggest advantages of Linux
over Windows is that you're not having to constantly tweak stuff to
keep it running at 100% efficiency.

So Linux has an autoupdate facility like Windows and OSX?

Who do you call for support on the particular version of linux you
are suggesting? I assume there is telephone support?

If you buy a commercial version, there certainly is.

Exactly. If I buy a PC it has windows on it for "free" so I have to
buy another OS and then get the same support as I did for the windows.

If you believe that, I've got some nice swamp land I can sell you in
Arizona. The MS which is preinstalled on most computers is far from
free. That is why it is possible to get a refund if you don't use it.


It appears "free" to the person buying the computer. The computer costs
X and comes with Windows and other free Sw. So as far as the average
user is concerned windows is free.

Your line of argument will confuse them. A confused punter will run to
what is same... the Universal world compatible Windows.

In my case my PC's are custom built.. We have a damned good independent
computer shop locally and they build to spec. SO I know how much Windows
costs

I would hope you would - so why do you insist on claiming it is 'free'?
It most certainly is NOT!



If you go into PC-world etc the cost is for "The Computer" and "all"
computers come with Windows "as Standard"

I don't go into PC-world etc - we don't have one in town. There are
several places locally where I can indeed purchase a computer with Linux
or with no OS at all. DELL will do that, too. I also note that the ones
WITHOUT ms cost less.

In message , ray
writes
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:37:26 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:53:51 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message
.com,
uncle ted writes
i should have added that i currently have cs4 and lightroom 2.4 as my
editing software.
thank you guys for all the replys, i can't read them all now im on my
lunch break ,ill read them tonight.

Stick with Windows. If you have problems with either of those apps
and call Adobe and tell then you are running Linux and an emulator
they will tell you they can't help! Their fist question will be are
you on Windows or OSX.... and a Windows emulator is not the answer.

BTW Linux is not an OS but a generic name for over 1000 different
versions of a base system. Versions of Linux come and go all the
time. Redhat and suse are two of the very few long stayers. Ubunto
has not been around long enough yet. I recall others that were going
to save the world a decade ago that are long gone.

BTW - technically, you are wrong. Linux is the kernel. There are not
"over 1000 versions of a base system" either, according to
distrowatch.com, there are around 300 Linux distributions - so?

445 apparently.... they have obviously cleared out the list.

Apparently you need glasses. The latest version of the distrowatch weekly
shows 312 active Linux distributions. You'd have to be a real masochist
to select an inactvie one.

I did't it was active when I selected it. Please suply a list of all the
distros that will go unsupported in the next decade so I know which ones
not to choose.


You don't
need more than one (or possibly two - if you have significantly
different requirements on different computers - just like you might have
a server version of MS as well as a desktop version)

No not like Windows... both versions would come from MS and be designed
to work together.

OK, you're right. Not like windows. You could easily set up both desktops
AND severs from one single Linux distribution.

Fair enough,

. Certainly versions of Linux
come and go - so do versions of MS.

No MS is till there.
I see. How is your support for win95, win98, win3.1?

Very good. However I knew in advance when the next version of windows
was comming out and when the support for each version will end.

Can you do the same for all distros of Linux... no because we already
know some have disappeared.

Win3.1, win95, win98 are version of Windows. The problem with linux is
there are many distros with many versions multiplying the problem 400
fold and at any time any of those distros could go out of support.


Linux distributions can (and do) disappear at any time on zero notice
(usually when wife/girlfriend call time, or they actually find a
girlfriend)

I'm not aware of a major Linux distribution that has 'disappeared' in the
last 10 years - that's how long I've been involved.

I still have CD's of Win3.1, 95 OS2 etc so they haven't dissapeared
either.

Which will be stable and there for the next 10 years? Which will have an
ongoing path with future hardware? Which will definitely continue to be
supported by the apps I want to use?

Most of the major players,

"Most"

I would asume - you would probably assume not.
Should we make a wager?

Could do

If I am going to base a business on it I need to know

Well, you can 'know' that support for win98 is gone and that xp's demise
has already been set.

Yes I know the number of YEARS form now that support will stop. I bet
you can to that with any particular release of Linux?

With a major Linux distribution, you install it
once and then do your upgrades as new versions of that distribution come
out.

As with Windows and OSX.. New patches and upgrades.

The problem with Linux is unlike windows where there is some major
changes Linux just tinkers with the system.

Look at the change from OS9 to OSx and Win3.1 to XP. etc

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

ray wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:44:54 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:46:26 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:27:20 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , Bob Larter
writes
Ray Fischer wrote:
ray wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:40:04 -0700, wrote:

looking for some input/suggestions on buying new pc.

im shooting with the 5d mark II ,raw files are big around 25
the mb region
my current specs are below .

machine is slowing a bit around 1 1/2 yr old looking to
upgrade to a new one .

INTEL PENTIUM 4 3.20 GHZ
NVDIA GEFORCE 7800 GS
200 GG HD ATA
4 GB RAM
WINDOWS XP PRO
GATEWAY 24 IN HD MONITOR
calabrated with the xrite pro
Problem is not with the machine - problem is with the OS. You
keep
mucking with MS it's going to keep running slower from the
day you install. Suggest you try Linux instead -
And using the computer will be slower from day one because
you'll have
to spend more time taking care of the OS.

With Linux? Are you kidding? One of the biggest advantages of
Linux over Windows is that you're not having to constantly
tweak stuff to keep it running at 100% efficiency.

So Linux has an autoupdate facility like Windows and OSX?

Who do you call for support on the particular version of linux
you are suggesting? I assume there is telephone support?

If you buy a commercial version, there certainly is.

Exactly. If I buy a PC it has windows on it for "free" so I have
to buy another OS and then get the same support as I did for the
windows.

If you believe that, I've got some nice swamp land I can sell you in
Arizona. The MS which is preinstalled on most computers is far from
free. That is why it is possible to get a refund if you don't use
it.


It appears "free" to the person buying the computer. The computer
costs X and comes with Windows and other free Sw. So as far as the
average user is concerned windows is free.

Your line of argument will confuse them. A confused punter will run
to what is same... the Universal world compatible Windows.

In my case my PC's are custom built.. We have a damned good
independent computer shop locally and they build to spec. SO I know
how much Windows costs

I would hope you would - so why do you insist on claiming it is
'free'? It most certainly is NOT!

If the price to the consumer is the same, what difference does it make
whether it was free to the manufacturer or not?

I just plain am not seeing any huge price differential between bare machines
and equivalent machines bundled with Windows.

If you go into PC-world etc the cost is for "The Computer" and "all"
computers come with Windows "as Standard"

I don't go into PC-world etc - we don't have one in town. There are
several places locally where I can indeed purchase a computer with
Linux or with no OS at all. DELL will do that, too. I also note that
the ones WITHOUT ms cost less.

For comparable specification? Show us.

On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:57:39 +0100, Chris H wrote:

[snip]
I see you have not tried Linux recently and have no idea what is
available.

Photoshop, Lightroom and aperture run on linux? As neither Adobe and
Apple produce Linux versions the answer is "no"

You can run Windows apps under Linux or OSX by using Crossover (http://
www.codeweavers.com/products/). It's not an emulator or a virtual
machine. So, you don't need Windows. It works by translating Windows
system calls to the equivalent Linux (or Mac) ones, and depending on the
app, the app runs as well as it would under Windows. Sometimes, a little
better. But not always.


--
Fotoguy
BestInClass.com
"Personalized digital camera recommendations"
http://www.bestinclass.com/digital-cameras

In article , Fotoguy
wrote:

Photoshop, Lightroom and aperture run on linux? As neither Adobe and
Apple produce Linux versions the answer is "no"

You can run Windows apps under Linux or OSX by using Crossover (http://
www.codeweavers.com/products/).

you can run *some* windows apps. you *can't* run stuff like photoshop
cs4 and you certainly can't run aperture since it's not a windows app
at all.

It's not an emulator or a virtual
machine. So, you don't need Windows. It works by translating Windows
system calls to the equivalent Linux (or Mac) ones,

it translates to linux, but it doesn't translate anything to mac api
calls, and why would it since photoshop, lightroom and aperture already
run natively on a mac.

and depending on the
app, the app runs as well as it would under Windows. Sometimes, a little
better. But not always.

and sometimes a lot worse, if it runs at all.

In article , ray
wrote:

I have both and there is no comparison. I would say that spending 100USd
on elements is better than using GIMP. As for comparing GIMP and
photoshop... only a religious fanatic would say GIMP is better.

I don't think anyone here has insisted that GIMP is 'better' (definition,
of course, will vary from user to user). But it is quite obviously
adequate for a large number of users.

taco bell is adequate for a large number of patrons but it's still
crappy food.

On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 13:38:29 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

ray wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:44:54 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:46:26 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:27:20 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , Bob Larter
writes
Ray Fischer wrote:
ray wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:40:04 -0700, wrote:

looking for some input/suggestions on buying new pc.

im shooting with the 5d mark II ,raw files are big around 25
the mb region
my current specs are below .

machine is slowing a bit around 1 1/2 yr old looking to
upgrade to a new one .

INTEL PENTIUM 4 3.20 GHZ
NVDIA GEFORCE 7800 GS
200 GG HD ATA
4 GB RAM
WINDOWS XP PRO
GATEWAY 24 IN HD MONITOR
calabrated with the xrite pro
Problem is not with the machine - problem is with the OS. You
keep
mucking with MS it's going to keep running slower from the day
you install. Suggest you try Linux instead -
And using the computer will be slower from day one because
you'll have
to spend more time taking care of the OS.

With Linux? Are you kidding? One of the biggest advantages of
Linux over Windows is that you're not having to constantly tweak
stuff to keep it running at 100% efficiency.

So Linux has an autoupdate facility like Windows and OSX?

Who do you call for support on the particular version of linux you
are suggesting? I assume there is telephone support?

If you buy a commercial version, there certainly is.

Exactly. If I buy a PC it has windows on it for "free" so I have to
buy another OS and then get the same support as I did for the
windows.

If you believe that, I've got some nice swamp land I can sell you in
Arizona. The MS which is preinstalled on most computers is far from
free. That is why it is possible to get a refund if you don't use it.


It appears "free" to the person buying the computer. The computer
costs X and comes with Windows and other free Sw. So as far as the
average user is concerned windows is free.

Your line of argument will confuse them. A confused punter will run to
what is same... the Universal world compatible Windows.

In my case my PC's are custom built.. We have a damned good
independent computer shop locally and they build to spec. SO I know
how much Windows costs

I would hope you would - so why do you insist on claiming it is 'free'?
It most certainly is NOT!

If the price to the consumer is the same, what difference does it make
whether it was free to the manufacturer or not?

Simple answer: it's not.


I just plain am not seeing any huge price differential between bare
machines and equivalent machines bundled with Windows.

If you go into PC-world etc the cost is for "The Computer" and "all"
computers come with Windows "as Standard"

I don't go into PC-world etc - we don't have one in town. There are
several places locally where I can indeed purchase a computer with
Linux or with no OS at all. DELL will do that, too. I also note that
the ones WITHOUT ms cost less.

For comparable specification? Show us.

One example: bought an asus eeepc from BestBuy for the wife for
Christmas. It came with Linux and it was in the neighborhood of $50-$100
less than the equivalent one with MS xp (of course, it was totally
incapable of running vista) - sorry, I don't recall the exact difference
at this point in time.

I do,now, understand why you and a few others are so afraid. It's a
matter of working for a computer repair facility, I guess. Afraid your
livlihood is going down the drain. With Linux, all you'd have to look
after would be hardware problems. No anit-virus software, no malware to
clean up after, no defragmentation problems, no periodic reinstalls to
gain lost speed. Don't even need to upgrade hardware so often as Linux is
much more efficient.

On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:30:03 +0100, Chris H
wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:20:44 -0400, Giftzwerg wrote:

In article ,
lid says...

So it's quite obvious that using GIMP on Linux (if it meets his
requirements) would be a big advantage. Even more when he does not
need to upgrade versions in the near future.

big if. gimp is nowhere near what photoshop cs4 is. any why wouldn't he
need to upgrade?

It says volumes about the "quality" of garbage like GIMP that people
will pay $600 for Photoshop when GIMP is free.

Especially when they'll gladly pay that $600 without even TRYING GIMP to
see if it will do what they need or not.

I did try Gimp. It is not as good as photoshop... not quite true there
is a learning curve with photoshop. For many Elements may be better.

For others, Gimp is better than photoshop. That would include anyone
who cares about the quality of the resampling necessary when you
resize, rotate images, correct distortions, etc. Gimp has the option
of using the much superior sinc-lanzcos interpolation. Last I
checked, Photoshop is still stuck with bi-linear.

If you don't notice a difference, you don't have a very discriminating
eye.

Steve

ray wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 13:38:29 -0400, J. Clarke wrote:

ray wrote:
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:44:54 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:46:26 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , ray
writes
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:27:20 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , Bob Larter
writes
Ray Fischer wrote:
ray wrote:
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:40:04 -0700,
wrote:

looking for some input/suggestions on buying new pc.

im shooting with the 5d mark II ,raw files are big around
25 the mb region
my current specs are below .

machine is slowing a bit around 1 1/2 yr old looking to
upgrade to a new one .

INTEL PENTIUM 4 3.20 GHZ
NVDIA GEFORCE 7800 GS
200 GG HD ATA
4 GB RAM
WINDOWS XP PRO
GATEWAY 24 IN HD MONITOR
calabrated with the xrite pro
Problem is not with the machine - problem is with the OS.
You keep
mucking with MS it's going to keep running slower from the
day you install. Suggest you try Linux instead -
And using the computer will be slower from day one because
you'll have
to spend more time taking care of the OS.

With Linux? Are you kidding? One of the biggest advantages of
Linux over Windows is that you're not having to constantly
tweak stuff to keep it running at 100% efficiency.

So Linux has an autoupdate facility like Windows and OSX?

Who do you call for support on the particular version of linux
you are suggesting? I assume there is telephone support?

If you buy a commercial version, there certainly is.

Exactly. If I buy a PC it has windows on it for "free" so I
have to buy another OS and then get the same support as I did
for the windows.

If you believe that, I've got some nice swamp land I can sell you
in Arizona. The MS which is preinstalled on most computers is far
from free. That is why it is possible to get a refund if you
don't use it.


It appears "free" to the person buying the computer. The computer
costs X and comes with Windows and other free Sw. So as far as the
average user is concerned windows is free.

Your line of argument will confuse them. A confused punter will
run to what is same... the Universal world compatible Windows.

In my case my PC's are custom built.. We have a damned good
independent computer shop locally and they build to spec. SO I know
how much Windows costs

I would hope you would - so why do you insist on claiming it is
'free'? It most certainly is NOT!

If the price to the consumer is the same, what difference does it
make whether it was free to the manufacturer or not?

Simple answer: it's not.


I just plain am not seeing any huge price differential between bare
machines and equivalent machines bundled with Windows.

If you go into PC-world etc the cost is for "The Computer" and
"all" computers come with Windows "as Standard"

I don't go into PC-world etc - we don't have one in town. There are
several places locally where I can indeed purchase a computer with
Linux or with no OS at all. DELL will do that, too. I also note that
the ones WITHOUT ms cost less.

For comparable specification? Show us.

One example: bought an asus eeepc from BestBuy for the wife for
Christmas. It came with Linux and it was in the neighborhood of
$50-$100 less than the equivalent one with MS xp (of course, it was
totally incapable of running vista) - sorry, I don't recall the exact
difference at this point in time.

You're sure it was for identical hardware?

I do,now, understand why you and a few others are so afraid. It's a
matter of working for a computer repair facility, I guess. Afraid your
livlihood is going down the drain. With Linux, all you'd have to look
after would be hardware problems. No anit-virus software, no malware
to clean up after, no defragmentation problems, no periodic
reinstalls to gain lost speed. Don't even need to upgrade hardware so
often as Linux is much more efficient.

Uh, what makes you think that I work for a computer repair facility?